science and i think some of the defense testimony put the lie to some of this computer testimony we ve already heard. the oak ridge testimony with this smell-o-vision, this smell-o-meter, this labrador device, that s not peer reviewed science. that s never been in a court of law in the united states. that s not mandatory, it s admissible. it s mandatory when it goes to appeals court in the state of florida a couple years from now. and i say if she s convict $, i believe a likelihood convicted at this point based on her not testifying, there is a good chance that that testimony will be thrown out and this conviction will be thrown out based on a whole panoply of junk science not peer-reviewed science. in my heart do i feel perhaps she s guilty? yes. what does the evidence show, that s what america is about. and the scientific testimony, although it may not be peer-proven, it goes to the weight not the admissibility,